Whatâ€™s In a 20,000 Year-Old Cube of Ice? - bestofyoutube.com

Main videos
Top videos
- All time
- Today
- Yesterday
- Week
- Month
- Year
- Random
Submissions (upcoming)

Vote

Whatâ€™s In a 20,000 Year-Old Cube of Ice?

Posted 4 years ago by Bobb in category: interesting

Comments (17)

DaveJoyce - 4 years ago [ Reply ]

3:34 "Whether you're standing in the middle of the Amazon rainforest or at the North Pole, you're breathing roughly the same air. Our atmosphere is pretty much the same everywhere, which means that a tiny air bubble from that one spot is enough to paint a picture of what the entire planet's atmosphere looked like"....... How STUPID does he think people are. What a bald faced lie. You have to make a LOT of assumptions before learning anything conclusive about one molecule of air from a glacier you assume is a certain age. Total garbage junk science right here in this video. Don't believe me? Just look at this animation from NASA showing the shifting levels of CO2 over time across the globe. It varies wildly! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth%27s_atmosphere

Reply to this post:

DaveJoyce - 4 years ago

Sorry, more precise link here to the animation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Following_Carbon_Dioxide_Through_the_Atmosphere.webm

heftygrain - 4 years ago

Dear Dave. In our modern age of humanity, CO2 emissions tend to occur where a lot of humans live in industrialized areas. This can lead to higher local concentrations. As you can see in the very first picture on the Wikipedia article you gave, there is a lot of red on top of higher developed countries. Ages ago, when there were no humans, it could very well be that the CO2 distribution was more equal throughout the atmosphere. Just like you I'm not a scientist and we might not have been fully informed, but I'd rather take a scientist's word for it because he's actually been studying it.

(guest) - 4 years ago

Actually, I wasn't able either to see the NASA animation from 150 years ago. Thus, the time, when CO2 was supposed to be spread evenly across the globe... The good point in Dave's opinion is, that he actually has one, unfortunately his way of thinking seems limited. (In psychology, this phenomenon is called Selective Perception; for a good definition see Wikipedia)

(guest) - 4 years ago

What is the range of CO2 levels shown in the NASA animation?

DaveJoyce - 4 years ago

My way of thinking is called common sense. Humans or not, there is no way the co2 levels in the Amazon are akin to the co2 levels in Antarctica. You donâ€™t have to have a PhD to see through such an obvious lie. The scientist never said that it was equal across the planet either, the narrator did, and he didnâ€™t cite a source.

heftygrain - 4 years ago

I have an opinion of my own, and it doesn't matches Dave's. :)

DaveJoyce - 4 years ago

That's because your stated opinion is "take the scientist's word for it" rather than think critically.

DaveJoyce - 4 years ago [ Reply ]

Last word on this, cause I know you all think I'm a science-denying oil shill or something. But nobody denies that humans add CO2 to the atmosphere (Carbon 12 as he refers to it). What is suspect is that we're already at ~410ppm on average and nothing significant has changed in the climate. Certainly no crisis, and certainly no evidence that CO2 is the primary climate control knob that controls the planet's temperature. Only tangible thing we've seen is the greening of Earth, which is most definitely a *good* thing. It's the alarmists that want to curb all CO2 emissions who are the "science deniers"

Reply to this post:

heftygrain - 4 years ago

Says the science denier.

heftygrain - 4 years ago

One last word on this, you haven't heard of the melting pole ice and glaciers, nor of increasingly extreme weather and drought in certain areas of the world? Come on.

DaveJoyce - 4 years ago

You mean the melting pole ice thatâ€™s threatening the polar bear population? Oops, polar bears are thriving. Never mind. And weâ€™ve always had extreme weather. Tell me the weather is more extreme now than it was during the 1930s dust bowl. (Hint: itâ€™s not)

heftygrain - 4 years ago

Who is talking about polar bears? Oh, just you again. I was more hinting to rising sea levels. How are you so sure there has been no increase in extreme weather? Anyway, it's still your word against mine, but I'd still rather believe in science.

heftygrain - 4 years ago

By the way, to say that polar bears are thriving is not exactly accurate given their threated status because of (guess what) climate change amongst others: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_bear

DaveJoyce - 4 years ago

The polar bear population is thriving. Those are your scientists saying so: https://www.thegwpf.org/content/uploads/2019/02/State-of-the-polar-bear2018.pdf and the IPCC (United Nations Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change) are the ones saying there's no uptick in extreme weather, and they believe the CO2 religious dogma.

DaveJoyce - 4 years ago

Sea levels are rising. Albeit *very* slowly. 3mm a year. In order for the doomsdayer's predictions to come true there has to be an exponential increase in the rate at which sea levels rise. A steady 3mm a year isn't going to lead to any sort of catastrophe or scary fear-mongering animation about how we're all doomed.

(guest) - 4 years ago [ Reply ]

20000 years ago was approximately the time of the last glacial maximum. When most of North America was covered in ice. So obviously the climate was significantly cooler at that point in history.

Reply to this post: